From drawings to the sky. Boeing F-15EX fighters for the Pentagon

86

In 2004, Boeing handed over the last of the ordered F-15E Strike Eagle fighter jets to the U.S. Air Force, and the fleet has not been replenished since then. In recent years, measures have been taken to update the material part, and their result in the near future will be the appearance of new F-15 aircraft. The current military budget allows the Pentagon to acquire several fighter aircraft of the latest modification of the F-15EX.

Financing for modernization


For the first time, data on the Boeing F-15X project (later the F-15EX designation appeared) in its current form was published in mid-2018. The reason for the appearance of this development was the desire of the Air Force to update the existing fleet of tactical aircraft aviation. Existing F-15C / D Eagle fighters no longer meet current requirements and require replacement or deep modernization.



In response to a Pentagon request, Boeing developed and introduced a new upgrade option for an existing aircraft. The project with the letters X / EX was created on the basis of the recently developed F-15QA - modifications of the F-15E to the requirements of the Qatar Air Force. QA and X / EX aircraft differ from the basic F-15E by a set of on-board equipment, a range of weapons, etc.


In December 2018, the U.S. Air Force announced their plans for the new F-15EX. The draft military budget for fiscal year 2020 provided for the purchase of 12 such aircraft with a total value of $ 1,2 billion. Later revised plans. In the next version of the draft budget, only 15 billion was allocated for the F-1,1EX project - for the purchase of eight aircraft. This number included two prototypes and six units of the installation batch. Such plans appeared in March, and a few months later entered the approved version of the military budget.

According to updated plans, the Air Force wants to receive 144 new type aircraft. In parallel, construction of new machines and modernization of existing ones will be carried out. It is expected that the emergence of a significant amount of F-15EX will gradually phase out or radically upgrade the obsolete F-15C / D and thereby improve the overall condition of the fighter fleet.

Real steps


After not too long discussions and the formation of plans, the Pentagon begins to realize its intentions. On January 28, a couple of documents appeared on the US government procurement portal on the topic of acquiring new aircraft and components for them.


The first document outlines the Pentagon’s plans for the F-15EX. The Air Force intends to sign a new contract with Boeing to update its fleet. The contract belongs to the category ID / IQ and does not stipulate the exact number of equipment and the timing of its delivery. The main method for the release of new equipment will be the modernization of cash machines.

A similar document has also been published concerning the issues of power plants. The contract for the supply of engines is awarded to General Electric Aviation. For an indefinite time, it will have to supply a number of F110 turbojet engines, provided for by the F-15EX project.

It is noted that both contracts are prepared in full compliance with the law. The choice of a single supplier for each product is not a violation, and also fully ensures the fulfillment of customer requirements.


By February 7, Boeing and General Electric must give their answer to the proposals of the military department. After that, the necessary negotiations will take place, during which they will determine the terms of the future contract. Agreements on the supply of equipment and other works may appear before the end of the current financial year. In the same period, the necessary funding will be provided for by the current budget.

In fact, the Pentagon is launching preparations for the production of F-15EX aircraft. These measures are interesting for a number of reasons. First of all, because the next F-15 fighter modernization project comes to practical implementation. Another reason is the timing of the project and related contracts. The last F-15E was handed over to the US Air Force more than 15 years ago, and the newest contract of this kind was signed almost 20 years ago. Thus, the production and deep modernization of the equipment of the F-15 family will be resumed after a record long break.

Replacement aircraft


According to open data, the United States currently has a not-too-large fleet of F-15 fighters of all major modifications - almost 450 aircraft remain in service. Most of this equipment is listed in the Air Force. A notable number of aircraft belong to the National Guard.


The main operator of the F-15C / D / E are the US Air Force. In their parts there are 89 F-15C aircraft, a total of 6 F-15D units and 210 relative to the new F-15E. National Guard Aviation includes 123 single F-15Cs and 17 double F-15Ds. Newer F-15Es of the National Guard were not transmitted. Only the Air Force has equipment of this version - about 210 units.

The well-known plans of the Pentagon provide for the arming of 144 aircraft of the new modification F-15EX. Some of the required equipment will be built, and the remaining ones will be converted from existing fighters of old modifications. The exact number of aircraft planned for construction or alteration remains unknown.

Obsolete F-15C / D fighters will be the first to be replaced. The Air Force has less than a hundred such vehicles, no longer distinguished by high combat qualities. They will be replaced with new F-15EX or rebuilt according to a modern design, which will lead to understandable consequences. Also, a number of newer F-15E Strike Eagle will be sent for modernization - with the same results.


The plans for the National Guard Air Force have not yet been specified, but it can be assumed that this structure does not yet have to master the promising F-15EX. However, as is always the case, some planes of old modifications can pass it to her. Over time, the National Guard can even count on getting the modern F-15E.

In the early stages of the discussion of the F-15X / EX project, concerns were expressed about its possible impact on other procurements in favor of the Air Force. In particular, according to one version, for the acquisition of the F-15EX, the Pentagon would have to reduce spending on the purchase of F-35 aircraft. Recent reports clarify that such reductions are not planned. Purchases of two fighters will be carried out in parallel and without mutual influence.

In general, the Air Force does not yet plan to reduce the number of types of equipment in service. As a result, in the coming years, fighter aircraft will include a number of modifications of the F-15 aircraft, not the newest F-16s, as well as modern F-22s and F-35s. Outdated cars will be repaired and modernized, but they are not going to abandon them yet.

Deep upgrade


The development of the new Boeing F-15X / EX project was started due to the gradual obsolescence of existing equipment. The previous version of the fighter, the F-15E, was built until the mid-XNUMXs, but progress did not stand still. In this regard, in the new project, measures were taken to integrate modern equipment and improve combat qualities.


F-15EX differs from its predecessor by advanced monitoring and detection tools that provide all-round visibility in several spectra. Under the nose fairing is a modern radar with AFAR. Airborne assets can be used both for target detection and in conjunction with a defense complex. The cabin equipment has been radically updated, simplifying the work of the pilot.

New GE F110 engines maintain high flight performance while increasing payload. The latter has been increased from 10,4 to 13,4 tons. Universal AMBER arms holders with advanced capabilities have been introduced. Due to this, the F-15EX can carry up to 22 small-sized air-to-air missiles or up to 28 SDB bombs.

From drawings to service


It should be noted that at the moment all these advantages exist only on paper. Boeing has already completed the bulk of the design work and, until recently, was awaiting a formal customer request. The necessary document has appeared, and in the next few days a new stage of the program will be launched.

In the near future, the Pentagon and Boeing will negotiate and determine the terms of work for the F-15EX. Then, two experimental aircraft will be built and tested, followed by a small installation lot. And only after that (probably in a few years) will the Air Force be able to order full-scale serial production or modernization of available equipment. Thus, the latest F-15EX project aims to bring significant benefits to the US Air Force. But this will not happen too soon.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

86 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -3
    31 January 2020 05: 59
    just wondering why the Americans do not strive to introduce OVT engines to "eagles"? do not provide for close maneuver combat? or tactics - to shoot down the enemy at a distance? but this is not always the case. and this ... a volcano type cannon ... even in the console ... I think it is disposable. will the glider survive? from a simple recoil, mama do not cry.
    1. +10
      31 January 2020 07: 33
      Eagle without UVT is one of the best aircraft, like the Hornet. The Boeing, in principle, always turned out to be the best aircraft, compared to Lockheed, the same Tomcat. And about the gun, on the MiG-23/27, the GSH-23-6 also stood, and nothing, here most likely it was also not 30 mm and not anti-tank like on the A-10.
      1. +8
        31 January 2020 07: 48
        Do not be so scared. On the 23rd double-barrel GSh-23L. The six-barrel GSH-6-23 is for the Su-24 and MiG-31.
        On the 27th. There, of course, stood the GSh-6-30 thunderstorm REO unit.
        1. +5
          31 January 2020 07: 59
          And the Volcano is still 20mm. "Trifle" compared to ours.
        2. +3
          31 January 2020 08: 30
          Thank you for the explanation. I’ll know, but still the GSh-6-30 were on the 23rd BN, though there were few of them.
          1. 0
            9 February 2020 01: 50
            Quote: K-612-O
            but still GSh-6-30 were on the 23rd BN

            Information came across that on one of these aircraft, after firing a cannon, the dashboard fell off. It was said that this gun was too powerful for this aircraft.
      2. +12
        31 January 2020 16: 49
        Quote: K-612-O
        The Boeing, in principle, always turned out to be the best aircraft, compared to Lockheed, the same Tomcat.

        Boeing’s ?! Truth?!!
        The F-15 Eagle was created by McDonnell Douglas, which Boeing devoured only in 1996, when the Eagle program was already declining.
        A similar situation with the F / A-18 Hornet: the same McDonnell Douglas ...
        And the F-14 Tomcat is generally Grumman, which is now (since 1994) "Northrop Grumman".
        Boeing's last "own" fighter was the P-26 Peashooter (1933).
        Lockheed, by the way, before the F-22A Raptor and F-35 Lightning II had Starfighter, F-104, about 70 years ago (they swallowed the F-16 Fighting Falcon with General Dynamics).
        1. +2
          31 January 2020 17: 26
          Exactly! After 1933 Boeing fighter projects either lost the competition to competitors, or the US Armed Forces refused them, for various reasons during the tests
      3. +2
        1 February 2020 21: 28
        Quote: K-612-O
        Eagle without UVT is one of the best aircraft, like the Hornet. The Boeing, in principle, always turned out to be the best aircraft, compared to Lockheed, the same Tomcat.

        What does the Boeing have to do with it? F-15 and F18 are McDonnell Douglas development (which Boeing just bought - when these aircraft were created and adopted), and F-14 is a product of Grumman, which was then acquired by Northrop, which, in turn, was absorbed just Lockheed!
      4. 0
        13 March 2020 09: 29
        Tomcat is Grumman, not Boeing.
      5. -1
        2 March 2021 23: 05
        Hmm. Indian pilots do not think so on their Su-30Ms. Air training battles between the Indian Su-30MKI and the American F-15C / D Eagle took place back in February 2004 at the US Air Force base in Elmendorf (Alaska). At that time, for some reason, no one began to spread about the victory of Russian aircraft. As well as about many other similar facts. Training battles Indian su-30mki, like the Malaysian ones, were conducted more than once not only with f-15, but f-16, f-18, Eurofighter Typhoon. The result is the same - dry!
    2. +22
      31 January 2020 09: 17
      This version is a flying radar and a huge arsenal of air-to-air missiles.

      It is rather a killer of super-maneuverable aircraft. For he can throw 3-4 missiles at every 3-4 and not especially lose in combat qualities. Whereas with another aircraft, this is the entire basic multifunctional load or half the load of BB. Dodge immediately from 120-7 AIM-XNUMX CXNUMX - an extremely difficult and unattractive event.
      1. +6
        31 January 2020 10: 04
        The need for F15 arose in connection with the rapid proliferation of long-range cruise missiles. To intercept them, super-maneuverability or stealth is not necessary, but high speed, a large radius of action, a powerful radar and a large number of air-to-air missiles are required.
        In addition, it is a high-performance second-tier bomber, after the F35 will remove air defense systems
        1. +13
          31 January 2020 10: 49
          Quote: Do not care
          The need for F15 arose in connection with the rapid spread of long-range cruise missiles.

          The F-15 was not born under the influence of the "shock" from the 1967 Moscow parade
          Su-15, Tu-22K, Tu-128, Su-17, MiG-23 and MiG-25. It was these machines that were named by American experts as the main threat

          FX-> F-15
          according to the results of the competition, summed up in December 1969., the first place was won by the project of the firm "McDonnell Douglas" ... "rapid spread of CD" then was not in my thoughts
          In December 1969, McDonnell Douglas received a contract worth 1146,4 million USD for the design and construction of 20 experimental fighters, which received the military designation F-15 and its own name Eagle ("Eagle")
          Quote: Aerodrome
          just wondering why the Americans do not seek to introduce OVT engines to "eagles"

          engine life and weight, la combat readiness (in Bitburg, this indicator was brought up to 92,8%), simplicity and cost of ground handling (compared to F-4, it required 44% less labor for 1 hour of flight and 45 % less time to prepare for the second departure. The process of replacing the engine lasted only 30 minutes)
          above all, farthest, faster than all

          about super maneuverability, they did not set such a task. And so they tried:
          in 1983-1989, F-15S / MTD (F-15STOL) with PGO and flat nozzles with thrust vector control (UHT) in the vertical plane and reverse.

          angular roll speed increased by 24%, and pitch by 27%
          then did all-round UVT with a round nozzle NASA 837 / 71-0290 (F-15В ACTIVE)

      2. +1
        31 January 2020 11: 54
        that's interesting, it can carry 22 missiles, and who is in second place in terms of the number of portable missiles?
      3. 0
        1 February 2020 21: 38
        Quote: donavi49
        Dodge immediately from 3-4 AIM-120 C7 - an extremely difficult and unattractive event.

        First, a hulking airplane with such a large arsenal needs to somehow get to the firing position, because it would not have to be dodged by itself earlier (and with such clusters of missiles it is all the more difficult, and all these suspensions make the task easier). Plus, it doesn’t matter to the electronic warfare systems how many missiles are launched - one or three, especially if the missiles are of the same type.
        1. +2
          1 February 2020 23: 31
          First, a slow-moving airplane with such a large arsenal needs to somehow reach the firing position,


          What makes you think that a maneuverable fighter with full ammunition will turn into a dull, clumsy "iron".
          The designers there are far from fools and will not catch superfluous missiles, and given that their missiles are 1,5-2 times lighter than ours, then there is no particular crime ....
          1. 0
            2 February 2020 00: 28
            Quote: assault
            What makes you think that a maneuverable fighter with full ammunition will turn into a dull, clumsy "iron".

            And you don't need to be an iron - it's like in a joke about a geologist, a Chukchi and a bear - you just need to "run" faster.
            Quote: assault
            Designers are far from fools there and they won’t catch the extra missiles,

            Not really, let's discuss one thing - either there will be "extra" missiles, or it will not be possible to "distribute 3-4 missiles to everyone" ...
            1. +1
              2 February 2020 12: 48
              Quote: Alexey LK
              Not really, let's discuss one thing - either there will be "extra" missiles, or it will not be possible to "distribute 3-4 missiles to everyone" ...

              Firstly, I do not agree with such a formulation of the question because it has not been proved that with twenty missiles the fighter will greatly lose in combat characteristics.
              Secondly, having fired off from a distance of 150-180 km (now the United States is in service with the world's most advanced medium-range air-to-air missile AIM-120D. The launch range, according to some sources, is up to 180 km) 3-4 missiles for each oncoming enemy fighter, the problem of "rearmament", as you call it, will disappear by itself, and when meeting with the surviving fighters, he will remain the carrier of another 6-10 medium and short-range explosive missiles, while the enemy will spend almost all of his ammunition on destroying missiles " first wave "....
              1. 0
                6 February 2020 17: 24
                Quote: assault
                I do not agree with such a statement of the question because it has not been proved in any way that with twenty missiles the fighter will greatly lose in combat characteristics.

                laughing laughing laughing
                Quote: assault
                having fired from a distance of 150 -180 km (now the US has the world's most advanced medium-range air-to-air missile AIM-120D. Its launch range, according to some reports, is up to 180 km

                This range is just not proven !!! The previous version claimed a range of 120km - so due to what the growth is 1,5 times? There was some kind of revolution in the field of turbojet engines, but we didn’t notice? ... Most likely, this is an ordinary cheap PR stunt - they took the most ideal launch conditions - the carrier at maximum height, at maximum speed, the target is extremely simple and convenient and t .d.
                In addition, you also take the ideal battle conditions - if AWACS will help, if our electronic warfare will not work, etc.
        2. 0
          3 February 2020 19: 43
          Quote: Alexey LK
          Plus, it doesn’t matter to the electronic warfare systems how many missiles are launched - one or three, especially if the missiles are of the same type.

          And what do you know about GOS AMRAAM-D?
          well, like this. to talk later about the role of electronic warfare ...
      4. 0
        6 February 2020 13: 30
        Anti-missile traps, electronic warfare, machine gun homing, figs of means against such missiles. And where will he go naked? It seems to me to put ours on F15. But he himself is more likely a victim against our Dryers and the same MIGs with P77 or those that are hanging on the Shell-S.
        __ It can be assumed that the opponents will shoot back and then the BVB will happen and sho =))
    3. 0
      31 January 2020 16: 32
      Quote: Aerodrome
      just wondering why the Americans do not strive to introduce OVT engines to "eagles"?

      Their OVT engine has a flat nozzle, that is, the tail section of the "Needle" will have to be completely reconfigured, what it will pull with it - only God knows.
      1. 0
        3 February 2020 19: 44
        Quote: PilotS37
        Quote: Aerodrome
        just wondering why the Americans do not strive to introduce OVT engines to "eagles"?

        Their OVT engine has a flat nozzle, that is, the tail section of the "Needle" will have to be completely reconfigured, what it will pull with it - only God knows.

        Have you never seen others with them?
        Can you just search?
    4. 0
      8 March 2021 13: 12
      why do the Americans not strive to introduce OVT engines to "eagles"?

      They would have implemented. If you could.
      A country in which 2% of university graduates and a country in which 40% of university graduates have slightly different opportunities to "strive to implement".
  2. 0
    31 January 2020 06: 01
    Something went wrong with the F-35 program ...
    And the cost of the new version of the F-15EX - definitely rolls over !!! Over $ 100 million ...
    1. +4
      31 January 2020 06: 05
      you read the text again, it says that they will be purchased in parallel without reducing purchases f 35, that is, an additional 144 new aircraft
      1. +3
        31 January 2020 06: 18
        I carefully read the texts. And you would be nice to familiarize yourself with the beginning, why the F-35 program was adopted at all. laughing and What types of aircraft, F 35 (IN all versions) should have been replaced.
        1. 0
          3 February 2020 19: 53
          Quote: Hunter 2
          I carefully read the texts. And you would be nice to familiarize yourself with the beginning, why the F-35 program was adopted at all. laughing and What types of aircraft, F 35 (IN all versions) should have been replaced.


          if you are talking about the JAST program, then since you read about it. they should have known that the developers of this very program branded it a shame. as about the impossible in real life .. Straight right away. those. in a year literally ..
          And so, in fact, the JSF program was adopted - where there are no replacements for the F-15 and F-22 ...
    2. +16
      31 January 2020 07: 02
      Quote: Hunter 2
      Something went wrong with the F-35 program ...
      About 500 boards have already been built. Indeed, something is wrong ... lol
    3. +9
      31 January 2020 15: 54
      Quote: Hunter 2
      Something went wrong with the F-35 program ..

      The F-35 can take 22 pounds of ammunition and has a ceiling of 000 feet and a combat radius of 50 miles at a maximum speed of M000, in contrast
      F-15EX -29 pounds of arms, ceiling up to 500 feet and up to 60 miles at a maximum speed of M000
      (feet / pounds, miles can’t translate, the ratio is important).
      therefore they need the F-15X
      an F-35 hour costs $ 35, and an F-000EX costs $ 15 an hour.
      degree of combat readiness F-15 (not X, but not the essence) 92,8%
      at F-35: 69,97% 9 and are still arguing whether this is so)
      The F-15EX is essentially a production aircraft. It has more than 70% similarity with the parts of the F-15C and E already in use by the US Air Force, and can use almost all of the same ground equipment, hangars, exercise machines and more auxiliary equipment, like the other F-15, which are now in operation
      Quote: Hunter 2
      F-15EX - definitely rolls over !!! Over 100 million $ ..

      less than $ 100 million (a bit), and by 2025 it will be corrected, and the aircraft is completely different
    4. -1
      1 February 2020 21: 41
      Quote: Hunter 2
      Something went wrong with the F-35 program ...

      Rather, though (although not excluding it), something went wrong with the Boeing company, and military orders didn’t hurt them to maintain their pants - they wash their hands, as they say ...
  3. +7
    31 January 2020 06: 03
    The aircraft from most F-15s will be distinguished, in particular, by the structure of the internal wing, controls, APG-82 radar with an active phased array, electronic video surveillance system and infrared search and tracking system. The fighter pilot will receive a helmet with a second generation JHMCS (Joint Helmet-Mounted Cueing System) display.
  4. +6
    31 January 2020 06: 03
    The planned F-15X raid is estimated at 20 thousand hours. Operational expenses per hour of a fighter’s flight will be $ 27 thousand (against $ 42 thousand for the 15C and F-15D). The cost of one F-15X will not exceed $ 65 million. The production of the new aircraft will allow, releasing dozens of cars a year, to load the capacity of the Boeing plant in St. Louis (USA) for years to come.
    1. -10
      31 January 2020 06: 10
      Quote: Vasily Ponomarev
      The planned F-15X raid is estimated at 20 thousand hours. Operational expenses per hour of a fighter’s flight will be $ 27 thousand (against $ 42 thousand for the 15C and F-15D). The cost of one F-15X will not exceed $ 65 million. The production of the new aircraft will allow, releasing dozens of cars a year, to load the capacity of the Boeing plant in St. Louis (USA) for years to come.

      were you allowed to publish it, or recommended?
      1. +4
        31 January 2020 06: 13
        no, just additional data
        1. -11
          31 January 2020 06: 14
          Quote: Vasily Ponomarev
          no, just additional data

          from the CIA?
          1. +4
            31 January 2020 10: 55
            From the House of Lords.
    2. -1
      31 January 2020 11: 38
      Soon the fairy tale affected ...
      And the price is lower, and the resource is higher, and small-sized missiles (curious - with what range?), And there are already 22 of them! and dozens of cars a year inlet ...
      Shake it - see.
    3. +2
      31 January 2020 11: 41
      The article clearly indicates the cost of the new version: initially the price was $ 1,2 billion for 12 aircraft ($ 100 million apiece), the final contract value is $ 1,1 billion for 8 copies of the F-15EX, which is more than two times cited by you $ 65 million apiece ($ 137,5 million)
      1. 0
        3 February 2020 19: 55
        Quote: Pike
        The article clearly indicates the cost of the new version: initially the price was $ 1,2 billion for 12 aircraft ($ 100 million apiece), the final contract value is $ 1,1 billion for 8 copies of the F-15EX, which is more than two times cited by you $ 65 million apiece ($ 137,5 million)

        Always consider. that in American contracts, the cost of a contract for the same aircraft very often includes the re-equipment of all technological production ...
  5. -5
    31 January 2020 06: 11
    Stunned, if the resumption of production of the F-15 takes place, then the F-35 will noticeably lose its export attractiveness
    The previous version of the fighter, the F-15E, was built until the mid-XNUMXs, but progress did not stand still
    I am not a philologist, but "until the middle of the two thousandth" and 2400 may mean.
    1. +1
      31 January 2020 06: 13
      mid 2005 means XNUMX, no need to be a philologist to understand this
      1. 0
        31 January 2020 06: 28
        I don’t know, I don’t know, usually the middle of the decade is denoted like that: mid-twenties, thirties, etc. years and possibly tenths. Or "the beginning of the century" is written. As it is not met "mid nine hundredth" for example.
  6. -8
    31 January 2020 06: 15
    In December 2018, the U.S. Air Force announced their plans for the new F-15EX. The draft military budget for fiscal year 2020 provided for the purchase of 12 such aircraft with a total value of $ 1,2 billion .... According to updated plans, the Air Force wants to receive 144 new type aircraft.

    But what about the F-35 Super Super Wunderwafer? Or is it intended only for shedding allies?
    Adherents of the Fu-35 may begin to minus me. It will be interesting to read their arguments.
    1. +8
      31 January 2020 08: 55
      They are going to be used in pairs, combining stealth f-35 with large ammunition and other f-15 go
      And how will be, life will show
      hi
      1. -3
        31 January 2020 09: 12
        They are going to be used in pairs

        It’s not possible to harness one cart
        Horse and quivering doe.
        I inadvertently forgot:
        Now I pay a frenzy tribute ... (A.S. Pushkin)
  7. +4
    31 January 2020 07: 52
    I always liked the Eagles, he had beautiful forms, and he showed himself perfectly - he did not lose a single air defeat.
    Replacing the F-15C is quite logical.
    This will be their Su-35S, only the F-15 base.
    Everything will not succeed in replacing the F-35, so don’t worry, but an addition to the F-35 is necessary.
    They will be the new Eagle.
    And again, not to replace the F-35, but in addition, which the author emphasized in the article.
    Although there are people who will write that the F-35 did not pass, that's why they want a new Eagle.
    Eagle and Lightning will fly in pairs, like Eagle and the Falcon, like Flanker and Fulkrum.
    1. 0
      9 February 2020 03: 11
      Quote: Jack O'Neill
      I always liked the Eagles, he has beautiful shapes,

      In my opinion, our graceful:




  8. 0
    31 January 2020 07: 58
    In principle, it was clear that the "penguin" would not be able to replace everything at once, there would be intermediate options for recruiting minke air forces ...
    In short, we'll see.
  9. -2
    31 January 2020 08: 16
    Quote: Jack O'Neill
    I always liked the Eagles, he had beautiful forms, and he showed himself perfectly - not a single air defeat.
    Replacing the F-15C is quite logical.
    This will be their Su-35S, only the F-15 base.
    Everything will not succeed in replacing the F-35, so don’t worry, but an addition to the F-35 is necessary.
    They will be the new Eagle.
    And again, not to replace the F-35, but in addition, which the author emphasized in the article.
    Although there are people who will write that the F-35 did not pass, that's why they want a new Eagle.
    Eagle and Lightning will fly in pairs, like Eagle and the Falcon, like Flanker and Fulkrum.
    1. 0
      31 January 2020 08: 52
      . like Flanker and Fulcrum.

      And did they really fly in pairs, and not each type in itself with its own tasks?
      1. -4
        31 January 2020 09: 20
        And did they really fly in pairs, and not each type in itself with its own tasks?

        Complemented each other.
        1. +1
          31 January 2020 11: 57
          I just didn’t hear about the tactics of their group application.
          1. -2
            31 January 2020 12: 59
            Initially, Fulkrum was supposed to work at a small distance from the base, and Flanker worked at a decent distance. In this sense, a couple, in this sense they complement each other.
  10. 0
    31 January 2020 08: 51
    . Thus, the production and deep modernization of the equipment of the F-15 family will be resumed after a record long break.

    The author is not quite right - the F-15 was made not only for the Pentagon, but also on the foreign market
    1. +3
      31 January 2020 09: 19
      This is just primarily for yourself (in contrast to the F-16blok70 / 72 / F21). To ensure superiority in the air, in view of the changing potential opponents, after the withdrawal from the composition of old aircraft.

      Well, yes, they will try to sell to all the gulfs, perhaps Koreans, Japanese, too.
  11. +1
    31 January 2020 10: 57
    After some time, the U.S. Air Force tactical aviation will consist only of attack aircraft (fighter-bombers of domestic qualification) - a single F-35A and two-seater F-15EX (the fighter gaining dominance in the air F-22 is discontinued and its decline is not replenished).

    What is called - flew laughing

    Multifunctional Su-35 - forever.
    1. +2
      31 January 2020 14: 59
      Formally, they are all multifunctional
      And f-15 with two dozen air-to-air missiles, it’s not possible to say that it’s not for air combat
      It seems that Americans believe that the presence of modern missiles with full-spherical launch, the crest of the system, infrared system, radar radar and other things reduces the requirements for aircraft maneuverability
      And as it really is, only experience will show
      1. -2
        31 January 2020 16: 19
        Supermaneuverability is needed for tactical aircraft not to participate in "dog dumps", but to avoid air-to-air and surface-to-air missiles. Super-maneuverability is achieved by the strength of the airframe, vortex aerodynamics and controllable thrust vector of the engines.

        The Su-35 and F-22 have super-maneuverability, while the F-35 and F-15EX do not.

        Therefore, the former are guaranteed to knock down the latter and leave the enemy’s missiles in battle at ranges exceeding a quarter of the maximum missile flight distance (after fuel has been generated in the rocket engine).

        Considering that the Su-35 is both a fighter and an attacker, the introduction of exclusively highly specialized F-35 and F-15EX projectiles is a programmed loss for the US Air Force compared to the Russian Air Force.
        1. -1
          31 January 2020 22: 46
          Quote: Operator
          Supermaneuverability is needed for tactical aircraft not to participate in "dog dumps", but to avoid air-to-air and surface-to-air missiles. Super-maneuverability is achieved by the strength of the airframe, vortex aerodynamics and controllable thrust vector of the engines.

          The Su-35 and F-22 have super-maneuverability, while the F-35 and F-15EX do not.

          Therefore, the former are guaranteed to knock down the latter and leave the enemy’s missiles in battle at ranges exceeding a quarter of the maximum missile flight distance (after fuel has been generated in the rocket engine).

          Considering that the Su-35 is both a fighter and an attacker, the introduction of exclusively highly specialized F-35 and F-15EX projectiles is a programmed loss for the US Air Force compared to the Russian Air Force.


          Oh, how much ridiculous nonsense has been written ....

          on 1 point.
          All super maneuverability is designed for speeds up to 550-600 kilometers per hour.
          all that is above already leads either to damage to the airframe, or to transcendental overloads for the pilot ...
          Not a single pilot in the world is capable of performing real combat missions with overloads over 9G. He then needs a sufficiently long time to recover.

          To leave an aircraft with maximum overload from two missiles with a maximum shunting overload of 40-60G (yes, the same nozzles with a deflected thrust vector are on most modern V-V missiles, and in the future all V-B missiles will also be equipped with ring shunting micromotors) - extremely unrealistic ...
          And after they have worked out the information exchange system in the swarm, the aircraft will have zero chances.
          When launching two missiles - they will always drive it under each other. The possibility of maneuvering the target aircraft, in various flight modes, is not unlimited and calculable. And the training methods for pilots and the physiological reflexes of pilots are also calculable. Accordingly, the chances of the target aircraft will be zero.

          For the rest.
          Why is the Su-35S multi-purpose?
          and the F-15E worldwide is considered multi-purpose and especially EX - it will also be multi-purpose. because he has everything multipurpose - a fighter glider, universal avionics, weapon suspension - a hundred species - but only the Operator - we have such an alternative?

          Operator, stop living in an alternative universe - I've been writing about this for 6 years ...
          finally turn on the mind ..
          1. +3
            1 February 2020 00: 13
            You confuse the maneuverability of the Su-27 (without UVT) at a speed of ~ 550 km / h with the super maneuverability of the Su-35 and F-22 (with UVT) in the entire range of subsonic speeds.

            And why should the Su-35 or F-22 be exposed to missile attacks at the first quarter of their flight distance (for the long-range western missile AIM-120D it is 45 km), when the rocket engine is running and the available overload of the missiles is ~ 40g? It would be logical to launch our missiles towards the enemy at a distance of> 45 km.

            That's when we equip the RVV with pulsed micromotors, learn how to control swarms of missiles and install KAZ on planes (as well as lasers, beam weapons, electromagnetic guns and other death rays), then we'll talk about it.

            From the moment of the transition to generations 4+ (Su-35) and 5 (F-22), only a super-maneuverable aircraft with UVP, and not "penguins" and "needles", can be considered multipurpose (fighter + striker).

            PS You will poke in Israel.
          2. 0
            1 February 2020 13: 52
            "Not a single pilot in the world is capable of performing real combat missions with overloads over 9G. Then he needs a rather long time to recover."

            The number of pi in wartime can reach four. And this is not the limit.
            (WITH).
    2. 0
      31 January 2020 15: 51
      After some time, the US Air Force tactical aviation will consist only of attack aircraft (fighter-bombers of domestic qualification) - a single F-35A and a double F-15EX


      What about the F-16?
      1. -1
        31 January 2020 16: 25
        The F-16 is also not a super-maneuverable aircraft and is discontinued.

        Therefore, as the resource is depleted, the F-16s will be transferred to the US National Guard, to the arsenal of limitrophs and to scrap, of course laughing
  12. +16
    31 January 2020 11: 13

    In the photographs - changes in the equipment of the pilot's cabin from F15C to F-15EX.
  13. 5-9
    +1
    31 January 2020 15: 04
    Is logical. F-22 only 168 pieces and will only be smaller. Existing F-15s are physically worn out. How to provide Homeland air defense? Yes, and F-22 may be needed for overseas operations to gain air supremacy. Well, not a slow pregnant penguin with a chased Single Impact Fighter ??? A good radar, a large range and speed, a lot of missiles .... what the doctor ordered against X-555 or X-101 .... taking into account their range, the carriers will not be available.
    1. +2
      31 January 2020 16: 35
      By the way, equipping with multi-position holders for R-77, IMHO missiles, the main way to modernize the MiG-31, as a defender of the northern direction from the American KR. With 4 P-33/37 + 4 P-77 you can’t get a lot of Tomahawks, but for example, with 16 P-77 it’s another matter!
      1. 0
        3 February 2020 19: 24
        Quote: bars1
        By the way, equipping with multi-position holders for R-77, IMHO missiles, the main way to modernize the MiG-31, as a defender of the northern direction from the American KR. With 4 P-33/37 + 4 P-77 you can’t get a lot of Tomahawks, but for example, with 16 P-77 it’s another matter!


        How many tomahawks will be able to bring down the Mig-31 in 1 flight?
  14. +1
    31 January 2020 16: 29
    So we need to think about such a deep modernization of the Su-35, Su-35 Moreover, in the first place already built.
  15. +7
    31 January 2020 17: 59
    The author creatively reworked an article from Defense Blog. It’s not in reproach that interesting materials often appear on the US Armed Forces- their armaments, development trends. So thanks to the author. In the order of friendly criticism, and how without it? The first one. Going deep into the details of EX weapons, the author writes about 22 explosives. The article also talks about more than two dozen such missiles - and not by chance. Any whim for your money (within the permissible payload). Since the Qatari aircraft will be able to carry up to 30 explosives, Israel in its specification indicates other requirements. Apparently, the case is in the Boeing-designed Amber holders. Their number can determine the nature of the weapon and its quantity. In terms of time, here, in my opinion, everything is simpler. Boig has 60 EX-36 for KSA and 24 for Qatar. Those. mass production has already been launched. At the same time, Saudi and Qatari planes are prepared in different configurations - for example, the Saudis ordered standard avionics, the Qatari-Israeli. In the photo of the cockpit posted in the comments to the article, in my opinion, the Israeli cockpit is just shown - a large monitor similar to the Samsung 4K TV is one of their chips. So the organizational and technological problems of fulfilling the order of the US Air Force are not expected. And more about the plane. It is equipped with the most powerful combat computer in the world today. The pilot can complete the task and play solitaire at the same time ... (about solitaire, a joke, if that).
  16. 0
    31 January 2020 20: 29
    I still wildly apologize - but where is the logic? After the mass construction of the 5th generation aircraft, mattresses return to the 4th release, and at a price more expensive than the F - 35. I would also understand that upgrading old people to the modern level, but they are going to make new ones, must be understood because in old, the glider resource is nearing completion.
  17. +1
    31 January 2020 21: 04
    Quote: TermNachTER
    I would also understand the modernization of the old people to the modern level, but they are going to make new ones, it must be understood because the old airframe resource is coming to an end.

    So new planes will also be built. And the resource glider in the United States has always slightly exceeded ours, alas. In my opinion, the development of a bunch of generations of aircraft and their development is very true.
  18. 0
    1 February 2020 04: 03
    Thank you, Cyril, for an interesting article that I would like to supplement and clarify in places.
    The F-15EX model is almost ready for the US Air Force because all alterations and changes are made and paid for by foreign buyers like Israel, South Korea, Qatar and Saudi Arabia.
    Boeing already supplies them with this version of the fighter plus the ability to carry 22 AIM-9X Sidewinder air-to-air missiles.
    The aircraft does not have an internal compartment, all weapons on suspensions. The cost of an hour of flight is $ 27 thousand (F-35 $ 45 thousand), life service - 20 thousand. hours, decades can fly.
    For comparison, the first F-15s could fly no more than 5 thousand. hours.
    The US Air Force wants to use it in conjunction with the F-35/22 as a flying “store” or “bandoleer” - the F-35/22 sensors see an approaching enemy, and the F-15 destroys it. There will be an unmanned version of this fighter.
    1. 0
      1 February 2020 10: 10
      It will be used rather as a "live bait" for subtle hunters
  19. +1
    1 February 2020 18: 07
    Damn, I read without glasses: F-1SEX fighters. I had to read the whole article laughing
  20. +1
    1 February 2020 22: 37
    And what is our "answer to Chamberlain"?
    - release of the upgraded Su-30SMD with the replacement of the engine with AL-41 and parts of avionics, modernization of 120 units. Su-30SM combat drill (no contracts, no funds allocated);
    - release by about the 22nd year of the modernized Su-34, with the replacement of the radar and avionics, modernization of the Su-34 combatant (no contracts, no funds allocated);
    The "highlight on the cake" could be a new contract for 100 units. Su-35S, but thanks to the "breakthrough successes of our economy" these plans seem to move into the realm of science fiction ...
  21. 0
    2 February 2020 13: 21
    "providing all-round visibility in several spectra" ... cool thing + using the possibility of polarizing filters and the output is an extremely interesting tool. Interestingly, the interchangeable picture will be formed on the screen of the pilot's helmet, or already the "dome" of the cockpit can synthesize the situation of the visible perimeter with a shared projection depth. And if it still has a neural harness as a single complex - well, then it will be generally lethal. Really interesting.
  22. 0
    3 February 2020 22: 15
    Quote: SovAr238A
    Quote: PilotS37
    Quote: Aerodrome
    just wondering why the Americans do not strive to introduce OVT engines to "eagles"?

    Their OVT engine has a flat nozzle, that is, the tail section of the "Needle" will have to be completely reconfigured, what it will pull with it - only God knows.

    Have you never seen others with them?
    Can you just search?

    I, baby, have been in the industry since you never dreamed of. So "search" is for you.
    1. 0
      9 February 2020 13: 20
      Quote: PilotS37
      So "search"

      What to look for him if right there in comments from Opus (Anton) (January 31, 2020 10:49) on experimental F-15
      1. 0
        9 February 2020 18: 49
        These are experimental samples that have remained so. Only the engine for the Raptor went into production with the OVT, and we must focus on it. And he - with flat nozzles.
        And you can fantasize about anything: about plasma, ion, photon engines ... About levitation, etc.
        Reality is a harsh thing: what went into the series - use it (if you can).
        Let me remind you that in this case it is not about creating a new aircraft, but about modernizing the existing one.
  23. 0
    6 February 2020 13: 49
    And in general, he was licked from our MIG25, because until the 25th all of their destroyers were single-winged. Yes, yes, from the one who was treacherously merged into Japan. That's why they don’t have an F-25!? I am ashamed to admit it
    1. 0
      10 February 2020 16: 06
      Quote: CBR600
      Yes, yes, from the one who comrade treacherously leaked to Japan

      Well, here you are, my dear, bent's!
      The F-15 made its first flight in 1972, and Belenko drove the MiG-25 to Japan only in 1976.
      It's another matter that the MiG-25 managed to make noise and light up well in the Middle East back in the mid-1960s, and yes, yes: the opinion that the Americans designed the "Eagle" under the strong impression of the 25th was widespread in domestic aviation circles back in Soviet times. Another thing is how much this opinion was justified ...
      1. 0
        10 February 2020 16: 37
        I read about the Eagle, and in the course of the first flight =) All the same, licked, and later licked.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"